It is good that we understand each other so well ;)
Now let me throw in this based on:
You are working off the assumption that each person sees a supreme power giving
them rights. I believe it comes down to the verb again. In this case it is to 'give
'. Working off the ideal that we do not really have
anything that is ours save it is given
to us to have
as our own we must rationalize that something cannot come from nothing. You are saying that there is a God that gives 'rights' (I do not doubt there is a God), what about those who do not believe there is a God? Then others may say whose 'right' is it to 'give' rights, even if the being is unseen - how do we know it is not a means to say 'we have a right based on 'x' supreme power'.?
I guess that is why governments like communism and dictatorships that try to extinguish religion and / or religious
freedom do not believe in a concept of 'born rights' nor a patron god. Whereas those governments that promote religious
freedom do believe in the concept of rights inherent to each individual.
So does it come down to belief?